[注]：加粗单词为不认识、不熟悉的重点必考词；加粗并倾斜单词是不认识的词和翻译错的词。
划掉的词语是一开始翻译的；红色的词语是书上的翻译。
Text 1
In order to "change lives for
the better" and reduce "dependency", George Osborer,
Chancellor of the Exchequer, introduced the
"upfront work search" scheme. Only if the
jobless arrive at the jobcentre with a CV, register
for online job search, and start looking for work will they be
eligible for benefit and then they should
report weekly rather than fornightly. What
could be more reasonable ?
为了“让生活变得更好”并且减少“依赖性”，国库/财政的大臣George
Osborer介绍出台了“向前预先找工作”计划。只有找工作的人只有带上简历到达了求职中心（就业服务中心），为了找工作注册在网上求职注册，并且开始找工作，他们才能为了利益有资格获得救济金，然后他们应该必须每周被报道，而不是前一天每两周一次向就业服务中心汇报。还有什么计划能够更合理吗？
More apparent reasonableness
followed. There will now be a seven-day wait for the
jobseeker's allowance. "Those first few days should be spent
looking for work, not looking to sign on," he
claimed. "We're doing these things because we konw they help
people stay off benefits and help
those on benefits get into work faster," Help? Really? On first
hearing, this was the
socially concerned chancellor, trying
to change lives for the better, complete with
"reforms " to an
obviously indulgent system that demands too little effort
from the newly unemployed to find work, and subsidises
laziness. What motivated him, we were to understand, was
his zeal for "fundamental fairness"——protecting the
taxpayer, controlling spending and ensuring that only the most desrving
claimants received their benefits.
这一计划还有如下更多明显的合理性紧随其后。对于求职者的津贴将有7天的等待时间【现在求职者领取津贴将有七天的等待时间】。“
最开始的这几天应该被用在寻找工作上，而不是期望注册登记领取救济金，”他说声称，“我们做这些事情是因为我们知道这些事能帮助人们获得摆脱救济金，并且帮助这些获得救济金的人更快找到工作。”帮助？真的是这样吗？第一次听到（这种说法）【乍听起来】，这是社会关注这位关注社会的大臣，试图改善生活，试图“改革”一种明显的陈旧系统并对一个明显宽松的救济制度进行“改革”，这个系统从新失业的人和自杀的人中 只需要很少的努力这个救济制度不需要哪些刚刚失业的人付出很大努力去找工作,从而助长了他们的惰性。我们理解激励他的是对“基本公平”的追求——保证税收保护纳税人，控制消费开支和保证得到他们救济金的唯一一种方式并确保只有最值得救济的申请人才能领到救济金
。
Losting a job is hurting: you
don't skip down to the
jobcentre with a song in you heart, delighted at the prospect of
doubling your income from the generous
state. It is financially terrifying,
psychologically embarrassing and you konw
that support is minimal and extraordinarily hard to get. You
are now not wanted; you are now excluded from
the work enviroment that offers purpose and structure in your life.
Worse, the crucial income to feed yourself and your family
and pay the bills has disappeared. Ask anyone
newly unemployed what they want and the answer is
always : a job.
失业是令人受伤痛苦的：在你心里你不能哼着一首歌那样跳过你绝不会心里哼着歌欢快的跳着来到就业服务中心，当被人怀疑你的收入的前景时不能高兴欣喜的期待慷慨的政府让你的收入翻倍。它是财政困难上让人恐惧
，物理在心理上让人感到尴尬，并且你知道最少的金钱支持
失业救济是最低限度的，也并且很难得到。你现在希望不被需要
，你现在被在你生活中提供生活目标和结构生活架构的工作环境中排除在外。更糟的是，不能养活你和你的家人，付账的微薄关键的收入也不可能实现存在了。询问所有任何一个刚失业的人他们想要什么，答案总是：一份工作。
But in Osborneland, your first
instinct is to fall into dependency——permanent
dependency if you can get it——supported by a state only too ready
to indulge your falsehood. It is as though 20 years of
ever-tougher reforms of job search and benefit
administration system never happened. The principe of
British welfare is no longer that you can insure yourself against
the risk of unemplyment and recrive
unconditional payments if the disaster
happens. Even the very phrase "jobseeker's allowance" is
about redefining the unemployed as a "jobseeker" who had no
fundamental right to a benefit
he or she has earned through making national insurance
conttibutions. Instead, the claimant receives a
time-limited "allowance", conditional on actively seeking a job; no
entitlement and no insurence, at 71.70 a week, one of the
least generous in the EU.
但是在Osborneland，你的第一个直觉本能反应却是陷入了依赖中——如果你能得到可以的话，你会想要永久的依赖
——通过政府支持你的错误和贪婪这种依赖受到一个非常乐意放任你错误思想的政府的支持。那正是虽然仿佛20年来对
职和救济金系统管理体制已经改革20年了但是还没有出现的原因越来越严厉的改革从来就没有发生过
。英国福利准则已经不是如果灾难发生时你能保证自己不受失业风险和接受政府获得无条件的资助了。甚至“失业者的救济金”也试图重新定义了失业的人为已经通过国家的保险条件但是没有获得救济金基本权利的“工作寻找者”，而救济金是他们通过上交国民保险金所应得的。而不是相反 ，领取失业救济金的人【申请人】领取一段时间有限的“救济金”，同时条件是积极寻找工作；没有报道补贴
也没有保险，每周71.70法郎，是英国政府仅有的最不慷慨的津贴之一。
加载中，请稍候......
喜欢
加载中…